Archaeology, Hurdle or Asset?
Section 106 exists to ensure that federal projects take cultural resources into account when project decisions are made. However, too many times, I have seen significant archaeological sites portrayed as another project hurdle, or even a nuisance, to get over. This portrayal is a public disservice and misses that archaeology is a chance for the public to become aware of and appreciate the rich history of their communities, and how archaeology can contribute vital information to understanding how communities developed through time.
This year several Indianapolis-area projects were in the news for unplanned-for archaeological discoveries resulting in negative impacts to project development. There was the proposed site of the new soccer stadium, on the former Diamond Chain property in downtown Indianapolis, and the adjacent Henry Street Bridge project—both encountering burials from the former historic Greenlawn Cemetery with resultant project delays. More recently, there was an article about IndyGo suing a worldwide infrastructure consulting firm for their handling of the Julia M. Carson Transit Center in 2013-2017. The fundamental elements of this suit stem from the consulting firm’s treatment of the risk for significant archaeological resources to be present in the project footprint resulting in notable project schedule and cost impacts. As an archaeologist, it is with mixed feelings that I read these local stories about archaeology; it is exciting that archaeology is being discussed, but it is disheartening that too often archaeological sites—and the regulatory process we have in place to address them—are simply viewed as an obstacle to overcome. Overturning this view begins with a better understanding of both project risk management as well as the regulatory process, known as Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA).
I will not go into a detailed discussion of Section 106. Instead, a quick summary (for context, as “archies” like to say) is that any project receiving federal funding, a federal permit, or requiring federal approvals is considered a federal undertaking, and thus subject to Section 106 Compliance. Section 106 requires a project sponsor (the entity receiving the funding, permit or approval) to consider their project impacts to historic properties, which are any building, structure, object, or archaeological site meeting the criteria for inclusion to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Not everything ‘old’ meets those criteria, but it is incumbent on the project sponsor, or more often their cultural resource management (CRM) consultants, to investigate and document resources within the project area of potential effects (APE), to determine if such historic properties are present and whether the project will impact them. Even for projects that are not federal undertakings, it can be a prudent risk management tool to investigate whether historic properties are present and to decide if something such as a former cemetery was situated where development is slated. This is where CRM professionals come into the picture.
The process starts with a desktop review of existing data for the project area, such as early aerial photographs, plat books, county histories, and, in urban areas, Sanborn Fire Insurance maps and local business directories. CRM professionals also look at databases accessible through the state historic preservation office, listing previously documented historic properties, including archaeological sites. These sources can provide a general view of what was occurring near the project and a specific view of what occurred through time on a plot of land. In urban areas, episodes of building, demolishing, and reusing areas have often occurred, leading to the possibility of entire blocks of businesses or homes being buried. While consultation with the SHPO may result in them recommending archaeological monitoring during construction, there are better risk management techniques than this. To mitigate the risk to both budget and schedule, it is prudent to investigate whether significant, potentially intact remains are present from those earlier building episodes. Your CRM professional can use non-invasive methods such as ground penetrating radar (GPR), they may recommend exploratory excavation either by hand or with mechanical excavators, or a combination of techniques. The goal is to determine the types of archaeological remains present, what their condition is, and if they represent something that could be considered eligible for inclusion to the NRHP.
While many archaeological discoveries are truly unpredictable and surprising, often with proper planning and informed analysis early in process, along with a good dose of curiosity, can make archaeology an asset to the project rather than an obstacle to development. Our teams work towards this end with the utmost care for all projects. We believe we owe it to the people to know about and understand the rich history of the communities we live in.
We Dig History At Conner Prairie
The sun was beating down, the archaeologist’s heads covered for protection, and the heat was rising from the dusty ground as we were sighting in the next feature location… you might be thinking this is the environment for excavations of Tanis looking for the lost ark. Note quite, we were on the western side of the White River at the location of Conner Prairie’s planned new Conservation Campus.
the boundaries of historic and natural resources
by exploring, celebrating and improving human experience they had an archaeological survey completed of the location of their new Conservation Campus. The goal of the project was to identify and define archaeological site boundaries. Connor Prairie went above and beyond to complete the work without any regulatory requirements and brought in local environmental consultants Metric Environmental, LLC to complete the excavation of two of the sites that were identified as potentially significant. Conner Prairie and Metric consulted with Native American tribes to create a work plan to guide the excavations.Modern tools like an Excavator were used that enabled Metric to efficiently strip the topsoil to find any soil discolorations that would indicate potential cultural features. The crew flagged stains and then cleaned them up to identify which were potentially cultural and would require further excavation.
The results of our excavations helped the team learn more about the historic people living in this location. Outside of our excavation area was the location of a house which burned and was demolished and removed around 2010. We found several subsurface features along with a 50-ft long feed trough that pertain to this historic occupation.
One feature that was discovered was a lime burn pit where the landowner was burning limestone to make a component for mortar helpful in construction or other repairs. Additionally, a wood post with part of the post still in it was found. The post is particularly interesting because the stain was a little wider at the top, than the bottom, making it seem that perhaps at some point the post started to fall, and hole in the ground was made a little bigger to let the post to be reset and then backfilled to get the post to stand up straight.
Another discovery was a water or gas line that ran from our site area all the way to the old house location. This line ran under feed trough, so it is believed that this line extended to the house prior to the 1940’s which is the best date we have for the feed trough.
The team also identified where the former farmer at some point put some of his trash. The bottle necks and the pieces of decorated whiteware date between the 1830s and the 1930s. It appears that this trash pit was used before the feed trough was potentially constructed at this location.
Metric Environmental completed a management summary that was approved by the state. Conner Prairie can continue their planning to start construction. The final part of the process will be completing the final report of the archaeology fieldwork including the finalized artifact analysis. All the artifacts will be sent to Conner Prairie for their museum collection.
What Does Integrity Mean To You?
I see in
tegrity as a cornerstone of our company. It guides every action and decision we make. While it’s impossible to get everything right all the time, I appreciate working with a team that is consistently striving to do the right thing. I witness integrity daily when interacting with my Metric colleagues. It is demonstrated in our workplace through transparency, accountability, fairness, leadership, our values, and respect for each other. Integrity is reflected in our ethical approach to environmental consulting, where we prioritize the well-being of our communities and the stewardship of our environment. Integrity has built trust with our clients and inspires our team to strive for excellence and quality. Every project we undertake is a testament to our commitment to integrity, ensuring that our actions align with our values and our mission to enhance the communities we serve.
Jodi Banton, Director of Administration